4 ms·

As a counter--FWIW--Agile works really well for me and my team. We work with 8 people in a "pod", we dogpile onto backlog items and destroy them. We pivot when

As a counter--FWIW--Agile works really well for me and my team. We work with 8 people in a "pod", we dogpile onto backlog items and destroy them. We pivot when the needs change. We trust each other but review the commits anyway. We don't do scrum-of-scrums (they're a symptom of a problem IMO), we minimize and mitigate any effects of external dependencies (e.g. our very first task in a project requiring them is to mock their expected/future implementation) ... We also eschew software solutions to sprint management, which matters. We also don't bother with morning stand-ups. ("Wait, you don't do morning stand-ups?!" - Yep. Morning stand-ups are training wheels for effective teams, and are necessary for folks that aren't co-located.) Anyway. I know that "wait, no, this actually works" doesn't sell books or tools or get clicks, but just know that folks proclaiming its death are probably selling you something. Like... video clicks for ad revenue.

vonmoltke 10y ago
> Morning stand-ups are training wheels for effective teams, and are necessary for folks that aren't co-located. They're also necessary for teams where people are working on multiple projects at once. All the happy stories I hear about Agile come from people in your situation, where you have a team of X all concentrating on a single project. I'd love to be in that situation for once in my career.
- pbrb 10y ago
  This is so true. I see Agile be incredibly effective for teams with a single focus, and no (or very minimal) matrixing of team members across other teams. Once you start matrixing team members or adding additional focus, you start getting the 45 minute long stand ups. It's nuts. One insanely massive benefit I've seen from agile for any team is time blocking via sprints. Getting 2 weeks of effort without changing priorities is a huge win in our company.
  - douche 10y ago
    2 weeks? I'd kill for two non-multiplexed days...
    - pbrb 10y ago
      Yeah, it's a constant fight to keep things that way. For teams that need to be more reactive/responsive to constant change (like my own), scrumban has actually been a pretty good fit. We're a small 3 person team who is expected to turn high priority items around quickly, while also running longer term projects at the same time. Scrumban let's us track both needs pretty well, and we even pull tickets from other team's boards that we get matrixed into, onto our own internal board. Highly recommend trying it if you're in a similar position.
- inanutshellus 10y ago
  Agile does not work well for service teams like tech-ops and stand-alone qa teams. Strict kanban works better for those. It still does work well for us even when we have multiple projects. Those multiple projects are time-sliced rather than resource-sliced whenever possible. In other words, keep your team focus on one thing for a given day. It's harder to get buy-in from your team to try it than it is to actually do and see succeed.
  - UK-AL 10y ago
    Kanban is an Agile Methodology.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    You seem to be using "Agile" to mean some particular methodology, probably (at least, this is usual when this mistake is made), Scrum. But Agile isn't a methodology; it is a set of principles and priorities for use in determining (and adapting over time) the right methodology for a particular operation. There are a number of methodologies that have been described as a result of (in theory, at least) applying Agile principles in particular environments. Scrum is one of those, but so is Kanban (and so are hybrids of the two, sometimes called "ScrumBan".)
  - inanutshellus 10y ago
    I can't edit it now, but, instead of saying "Agile (sic) doesn't work well for service teams" I should've said "Choose your own flavor of Agile Methodology to suit your needs".

vonmoltke 10y ago

> Morning stand-ups are training wheels for effective teams, and are necessary for folks that aren't co-located. They're also necessary for teams where people are working on multiple projects at once. All the happy stories I hear about Agile come from people in your situation, where you have a team of X all concentrating on a single project. I'd love to be in that situation for once in my career.

pbrb 10y ago
This is so true. I see Agile be incredibly effective for teams with a single focus, and no (or very minimal) matrixing of team members across other teams. Once you start matrixing team members or adding additional focus, you start getting the 45 minute long stand ups. It's nuts. One insanely massive benefit I've seen from agile for any team is time blocking via sprints. Getting 2 weeks of effort without changing priorities is a huge win in our company.
- douche 10y ago
  2 weeks? I'd kill for two non-multiplexed days...
  - pbrb 10y ago
    Yeah, it's a constant fight to keep things that way. For teams that need to be more reactive/responsive to constant change (like my own), scrumban has actually been a pretty good fit. We're a small 3 person team who is expected to turn high priority items around quickly, while also running longer term projects at the same time. Scrumban let's us track both needs pretty well, and we even pull tickets from other team's boards that we get matrixed into, onto our own internal board. Highly recommend trying it if you're in a similar position.
inanutshellus 10y ago
Agile does not work well for service teams like tech-ops and stand-alone qa teams. Strict kanban works better for those. It still does work well for us even when we have multiple projects. Those multiple projects are time-sliced rather than resource-sliced whenever possible. In other words, keep your team focus on one thing for a given day. It's harder to get buy-in from your team to try it than it is to actually do and see succeed.
- UK-AL 10y ago
  Kanban is an Agile Methodology.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  You seem to be using "Agile" to mean some particular methodology, probably (at least, this is usual when this mistake is made), Scrum. But Agile isn't a methodology; it is a set of principles and priorities for use in determining (and adapting over time) the right methodology for a particular operation. There are a number of methodologies that have been described as a result of (in theory, at least) applying Agile principles in particular environments. Scrum is one of those, but so is Kanban (and so are hybrids of the two, sometimes called "ScrumBan".)
- inanutshellus 10y ago
  I can't edit it now, but, instead of saying "Agile (sic) doesn't work well for service teams" I should've said "Choose your own flavor of Agile Methodology to suit your needs".